Originally posted by suntansuperman
Originally posted by william78
Originally posted by suntansuperman
Wow, seems way too complicated tbh. Sure it adds more fun, but I strongly, strongly, strongly dislike the idea of being kicked off of a team because of level. In fact that's pretty much the only reason I like this game still because all the teams I'm on are pretty awesome, win or lose.
With the level cap being a total level cap you wouldn't be kicked off as you exceeded it but owners would have to manage that if they have a level 30 their backup is gonna be much lower level and indeed would have some choices to make.
As far as complicated the competition issue is one that I think will require some detailed answers weather mine of anyone else's but I think its pretty vital to address it at some point. Lot's of well meaning dedicated owners continue to quit because of the hassle and bother and lots of players are becoming bored with their level 30+ players. At some point a solution for those two issues does need to be addressed.
So in other words, if a bunch of people wanted to be on the same team, all leveled up equally, but then lost someone due to retirement or whatever, they'd be screwed? i.e. All at level 34, so total level would be say, 45*34 which equals 1530, now say in their four seasons starting at BBB, they only made it up to AA, which has the "level cap" of 1232, Say they lost one agent, who owned three players, what would happen then? Would the entire team have to disband to get under the "level cap" or what? And for the record I'm currently on two teams like this.
Great question: I don't think it would create that problem exactly , first off with that setup there would be no BBB as their would be more AAA and more AA teams. Basically with that setup it turns the pyramid into a bit more of a diamond shape - few teams at the top, most in the middle, and some at the bottom. It has slightly more teams (346 more) than GLB has right now. As I said I do have more details in my own forum (about 5 posts that size worth) but even a team over the cap would be allowed to sign a minimum level player (10 for A, 20 for AA) you could replace your guys who wanted to leave but would have to do so by going younger and developing players rather than adding instant star replacements.
Similar to: What the NBA does with the salary cap, teams can go over to sign players to the minimum except in this case it would be minimum level not dollar amount. This would certainly help to increase parity - and the best quote i've read about parity on GLB is "the only people who want more parity are bad teams and smart people".
Originally posted by william78
Originally posted by suntansuperman
Wow, seems way too complicated tbh. Sure it adds more fun, but I strongly, strongly, strongly dislike the idea of being kicked off of a team because of level. In fact that's pretty much the only reason I like this game still because all the teams I'm on are pretty awesome, win or lose.
With the level cap being a total level cap you wouldn't be kicked off as you exceeded it but owners would have to manage that if they have a level 30 their backup is gonna be much lower level and indeed would have some choices to make.
As far as complicated the competition issue is one that I think will require some detailed answers weather mine of anyone else's but I think its pretty vital to address it at some point. Lot's of well meaning dedicated owners continue to quit because of the hassle and bother and lots of players are becoming bored with their level 30+ players. At some point a solution for those two issues does need to be addressed.
So in other words, if a bunch of people wanted to be on the same team, all leveled up equally, but then lost someone due to retirement or whatever, they'd be screwed? i.e. All at level 34, so total level would be say, 45*34 which equals 1530, now say in their four seasons starting at BBB, they only made it up to AA, which has the "level cap" of 1232, Say they lost one agent, who owned three players, what would happen then? Would the entire team have to disband to get under the "level cap" or what? And for the record I'm currently on two teams like this.
Great question: I don't think it would create that problem exactly , first off with that setup there would be no BBB as their would be more AAA and more AA teams. Basically with that setup it turns the pyramid into a bit more of a diamond shape - few teams at the top, most in the middle, and some at the bottom. It has slightly more teams (346 more) than GLB has right now. As I said I do have more details in my own forum (about 5 posts that size worth) but even a team over the cap would be allowed to sign a minimum level player (10 for A, 20 for AA) you could replace your guys who wanted to leave but would have to do so by going younger and developing players rather than adding instant star replacements.
Similar to: What the NBA does with the salary cap, teams can go over to sign players to the minimum except in this case it would be minimum level not dollar amount. This would certainly help to increase parity - and the best quote i've read about parity on GLB is "the only people who want more parity are bad teams and smart people".
Last edited Nov 23, 2008 06:46:46